Pleas & Sentencing – Conditions of Supervised Release

Listen to this article

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: United States of America v. David L. Crisp, Jr.

Case No.: 15-2694

Officials: POSNER, EASTERBROOK, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.

Focus: Pleas & Sentencing – Conditions of Supervised Release

Appellant properly ordered to pay for substance abuse treatment as part of supervised release.

“We agree with the Fifth and Ninth Circuits that the comparisons to schedules for fine payments and restitution payments are not persuasive here. The statutes governing fine and restitution schedules are much more detailed and explicit about the district court’s responsibilities. See 18 U.S.C. § 3572 (d)(2) and (3) (requiring court, if immediate payment of fine is not required, to set schedule for “shortest time in which full payment can reasonably be made” and to require defendant to notify court of material change in economic circumstances); § 3664(f)(2) (requiring court to “specify in the restitution order the manner in which, and the schedule according to which, the restitution is to be paid….”)(emphasis added). As noted, § 3672 has only one general sentence addressing the ability-to-pay question and provides no details about how courts are to determine if “funds are available” or the method and procedure by which “such funds” should be paid to the probation office”

Affirmed

Full Text

Attorney Derek A. Hawkins is the managing partner at Hawkins Law Offices LLC, where he heads up the firm’s startup law practice. He specializes in business formation, corporate governance, intellectual property protection, private equity and venture capital funding and mergers & acquisitions. Check out the website at www.hawkins-lawoffices.com or contact them at 262-737-8825.